AI Terminator v. HI Humanator on the Legal Ethics Battlefield

In the present day of increasing technology, attorneys need to learn about "big picture" challenges to legal ethics principles posed by advances in technology generally and "artificial intelligence" (AI) in particular. 

Stephan Hawking, the leading physicist of the latter 20th and early 21st centuries, predicted (until he died in 2018) that "artificial intelligence" would be mankind's "last invention." How near or far into the future is such a fate? Will he be proven right or will human intelligence (HI) manage to prevent such apocalypse? How long will AI's "childhood" last? Will it be possible to identify evolutionary changes warranting countermeasures so they don't become irreversible revolutionary changes for the worse rather than the better? Do not ethical duties of the legal profession necessarily include continuing vigilance regarding such technological changes to enable attorneys to protect and preserve the tools (such as attorney-client confidentiality and privilege) needed for the legal profession to continue performing the important mission of safeguarding liberty writ large?

The format of this program is a blend of the lecture method with the Socratic method, extensively involving a high degree of interactive participation and critical analyses of a wide range of issues relevant to the seminar subject in a manner not limited to mere chronological description of particular topics and sub-topics. In other words, the content of each seminar (and the order and extent of emphasis upon specific topics and sub-topics) will be substantially influenced by the nature and extent of interactive participation regarding particular aspects thereof. Depending on the number of participants in a specific seminar, the format usually results in most, if not all, participants verbally engaging in conversational-styled interactive discussion and analysis of particular topics in the seminar and also permits interruptions, questions, challenges, etc. throughout the seminar. Think of collegially enjoyable and enlightening round-table discussions. It's a form of learning by thinking in the course of interactively participating rather than learning solely by listening (the latter of which is the lecture method).

Attorneys at any level who understand (a) that the very nature of the constitutional form of government is to protect the good of liberty from the evil of tyranny, (b) that, therefore, the primary mission of the legal profession is to protect liberty writ large within the bounds of the rule of law [in contrast to the rule of men (mankind)], and (c) that protecting such good from such evil requires the legal profession to be disciplined by understanding essential principles of science in seeking to prevent the latter from destroying the former are encouraged to attend this program.

Learning Objectives:  

• Refresh what should be every lawyer's common knowledge of unique aspects of the legal profession in contrast to all other professions, occupations, etc.: It's the effect of the Constitution's (and each state constitution's) vesting of "the judicial power" of the sovereign in its "Supreme Court" and its thereby incorporation of the evolutionary nature of the judiciary's common law inherent judicial power (i.e., sui generis power) to define, prescribe, and enforce educational, moral, ethical and civil standards for the practice of law and the status of lawyers as officers of the courts
• Assess how exercising such common law inherent judicial power (sui generis power) in an adversarial system created under common law, the supreme court of the sovereign (i.e., the U.S. Supreme Court and each state supreme court) creates structural and functional tools for the administration of justice -- i.e., rules of evidence, burdens of proof, procedural rules, definitions of the practice of law, regulatory control over the conduct of attorneys, and the nature and scope of attorney-client confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, and attorney work-product
• Acknowledge how the judiciary generally encourages lawyers to utilize modern devices, programs, applications and procedures and in some contexts specifically requires utilization of particular devices, programs, applications and procedures while also requiring lawyers to utilize them in ways that comport with duties imposed by the judiciary upon lawyers)
• Recognize that in a broad variety of contexts, lawyers' uses of such devices, programs, applications and procedures intrinsically undermine the extent of privacy necessary for proper utilization of particular tools (such as attorney-client confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, and attorney work-product), and such undermining of privacy a fortiori interferes with, or jeopardizes, lawyers' abilities to utilize them in ways that comport with duties imposed by the judiciary upon lawyers. This creates a conundrum. What is (are) the solution(s) to this conundrum?
• Realize that it is necessary for attorneys to have sufficient scientific literacy to recognize the contexts in which technology can undermine or even negate efforts by attorneys to satisfy the legal and ethical duties imposed upon them by the judicial branch as "officers of the courts." 
• Explore the nature and ubiquity of technological threats to attorneys’ ethical duties are such that efforts by individual attorneys to counter or negate such threats cannot succeed without overt and comprehensive regulatory measures by the courts to provide constitutionally effective countermeasures against such threats
   

Course Time Schedule:

Eastern Time: 3:30 PM - 5:30 PM
Central Time: 2:30 PM - 4:30 PM
Mountain Time: 1:30 PM - 3:30 PM
Pacific Time: 12:30 PM - 2:30 PM
Alaska Time: 11:30 AM - 1:30 PM
Hawaii-Aleutian Time: 10:30 AM - 12:30 PM

This course is also being presented on the following dates:

Wednesday, February 26, 2025
Wednesday, March 5, 2025
Wednesday, March 12, 2025
Wednesday, March 19, 2025
Wednesday, March 26, 2025

*This course is not approved for Ethics for Kansas. It is approved for Substantive CLE credit.